Apparently, our government doesn’t care much about this country being less dependent on foreign oil.

We supposedly have all this natural gas here. The companies that drill for it want to get permits to send the gas overseas to make more money on it, just like they do with the oil they drill for here and turn into gas, which they send overseas.

If the government cared, it would not let them take what they find under our ground and send it overseas. What they drill for and get here should stay.

It’s not like the oil companies aren’t make money on it here. I think making a billion dollars a year on gas here should be enough profit.

We all know these companies give millions of dollars a year to our politicians, but what is right is right.

Join the Discussion:

Previous Discussion: 22 comments so far…

Comments are moderated by Las Vegas Sun editors. Our goal is not to limit the discussion, but rather to elevate it. Comments should be relevant and contain no abusive language. Comments that are off-topic, vulgar, profane or include personal attacks will be removed. Full comments policy. Additionally, we now display comments from trusted commenters by default. Those wishing to become a trusted commenter need to verify their identity or sign in with Facebook Connect to tie their Facebook account to their Las Vegas Sun account. For more on this change, read our story about how it works and why we did it.

Only trusted comments are displayed on this page. Untrusted comments have expired from this story.

By 2020, possibly sooner, the U.S. will be totally energy self-dependent and a huge net exporter of natural gas and oil worldwide. The more the U.S. drills, fracks, and exports, the better. Not just for the U.S. economy, U.S. employment, and U.S. energy prices, but for the entire world.

"Obama rejected the Keystone pipeline which would have safely brought oil from Canada in favor of bringing it by Train tanker cars - less safe." Future

May I add, more detrimental to the air and environment with pollution. Let's look at one of the beneficiaries of the President's decision: Warren Buffett. He bought Burlington Northern Santa Fe in 2010 to transport oil by rail across the U.S. He's made $2-2.5 Billion annually in net profit and $3.7 Billion in 2012. Buffett is a democrat and huge Obama supporter.

Sorry John...If we want to participate in and be a leader of the global economy then we need to export and import goods and services in the most cost-efficient and profitable manner. The same economic forces which provide you choices in T-shirts also affect choices in fuels. IMO, those forces should also affect labor....as in immigration labor.

The letter writer appears to be uniformed about the enormous abundance of natural gas produced by the U.S. Because of technological advances in its production,exports are now possible and advantageous to producers. This is a positive development.

On the other hand oil production from fracking technology has led to an unexpected oil boom in America that is pushing the U.S. toward oil independence, and this increased producteion is already reported to be causing a rift between OPEC producing nations,specially between the Arab and African members. OPEC is trying to downplay the impact on their nations from the large increase in U.S. oil production.

As a side note, this incredible boom in oil and natural gas production is occurring on private lands, without the benefit of goverment help.The Obama administration unsurprisingly speaks out of both sides of its mouth. On the one hand it takes credit for increased production for which it contributes no support,and even undermines with more restictive environmental policies. On the other hand it unsuccessfully supports solar and other green energy initiatives which have failed, and are too expensive to compete in the market place.

Jeff argues "Last year, President Obama approved the southern leg of the Keystone XL pipeline, which will transport deadly Canadian tar-sands oil from Oklahoma down to the Gulf of Mexico in Texas where it will be refined and then promptly placed on oil rigs to be sold in South America, Europe, and Asia."

Liberal Jeff is saying it all Obama's fault.

Jeff is mad as heck because Obama is allowing international oil companies to have operations in the US. International companies paying US taxes. Hummmm

Jeff is mad because Obama is letting warren Buffet move the oil on his personal railroad.

Jeff is happy that Obama is the no carbon President yet Carbon fuel is fungible and moving every which way. Amazing.

Did you hear where since Obama retreated from Iraq without a status of force agreement that China is buying and taking all the Iraq oil. amazing how it is working out for Obama.

It isn't the government controlling oil production, it's the corporations who through their political puppets in Washington are globalizing the sale of oil.

Unless we nationalize the production of oil as Argentina and other countries, oil will continue to be "outsourced" by corporations.

Want to get to keep our oil? Get corporations and their lobbyists out of politics!

Oil will not last forever and sooner or later those dolts who are anti climate change will come around as we experience harsher weather patterns. We need to get onboard with reuseable energy and invest in that future technology. Even China is beginning to come around as they see the negative effects of carbon dioxide production in their country.

Of course the hinge heads will chime in about the XL pipeline which has squat to do with the issue because that toxic tar oil belongs to the Canadians. They aren't giving it us for free, are they?

You are starting to realize all the talking points spewed by conservatives are bogus.

First, we have no shortage of oil and gas. We have been adding to our inventory at Cushing, Oklahoma for the past eight years. (Check the EIA.gov website). We have more oil and gas on hand now than when gasoline was 99 cents a gallon back in the late 1990's, following the Asian Financial Crisis.

That is the reason for the southern extension of the Keystone Pipeline. The Seaway pipeline was reversed to keep oil prices artificially high by sending oil from Cushing to the Texas Gulf Coast.

Second, oil and gas are considered commodities. They are traded openly on the world market, so they go to the highest bidder. Since we have more gas than we can use, oil companies sell it overseas.

Third, Canada, Mexico and Venezuela are the largest exporters of crude to the United States. We are not dependent on Middle Eastern oil. Our refineries are set up to crack light sweet crude (West Texas Intermediate), not he heavy, high sulfur crude from the Middle East.

Fourth, we have not regulated the markets. The reason we have high gas prices is due to speculation. Low interest rates lead to easy money. Easy money needs a return. Since bonds rates, treasury rates and savings rates are low, this money flows into the capital markets. There it is used to drive up stocks and commodities. (Warning! This has caused a bubble in the commodities and stock markets).

I have read the Keystone argument on the comments as well.

No one has asked this question, "If refining bitumen is such a good thing, why don't they do it in Canada?"

The answer is that refining bitumen causes high levels of pollution and carcinogens. The Canadian government will not allow this happen and drive up the medical and environmental costs associated with the refinement process. The oil companies have proven they are unwilling to clean up or pay for any damages associated with the transport or refinement of oil.

Keystone is good for the oil companies, not the people of the United States and Canada.

Our energy policies is made to benefit the corporations, not the consumer. That is why you are this ridiculous energy policy.

Posters from the liberal side are obsessed with the false fantasy of climate change. They are drinking Al Gore's Koolaid--the guy who invented the internet--and an avowed nut case. The other lunatic proposal is that the oil industry be nationalized. Given the progress chilling impact of big government, and the vastly incompetent,unaccountable and corrupt nature of government, it is unimaginable that anything of real importance would be vested in government. In any event private enterprise initiative and innovation are superior in nature to anything that a bogged down,clumsy slow moving government can do.

He's consistent however! He continues to throw rocks at President Obama and continues to be a very poor shot!

Guys such as Future don't get it and they NEVER will. Our continued use of fossil fuels is a "ticking time bomb" that is leading us down a road named "total destruction."

Even China is moving forward with more research and development in the area of green/renewable energy.

We, as a nation, however, continues to harbor the belief that the world's current supply of fossil fuels will NEVER run out.....

The amount of money that we spend yearly on importing foreign oil has put us between "a rock & a hard place."

Over $600 billion is spent each year on foreign oil and that's money that, for the most part, is leaving this country never to return.

The current use of "fracking" and the building of a new oil pipe line is ONLY a small insignificant answer to our long term energy needs....

Future, like most right-wingers, hates progress, hates change and innovation. Of course, Future will tell you that "fracking" is an example of progress and innovation that's taking place and he may be correct if we don't mind cutting off our nose in order to spite our face!

I wonder if Future has stopped long enough with his ranting to make a connection between the numerous storms and tornadoes that are striking the "heart land" with our continued use of fossil fuels?

Jeff says "hope you and CDF are getting paid for the lies and misinformation you spread,"

There is no lie in the fact that Obama pulled the plug - retreated from Iraq - without the "status of forces" agreement leaving the door open to China to fill the power vacuum on oil -- and for Iran to fill the power vacuum on Islamic terrorists. Russia and Iran are flying weapons into Syria's Assad right over Iraq feeding the growing regional war.

While it seems best we keep all the gas to ourselves free market commerce has to continue. For example we sell some of our surplus Natural gas to Japan, who has none, and they sell us cars. When ever a product produced in one country is sold to another country it produces more jobs for the exporting country.

Canada is our neighbor and largest trading partner. It is rich in natural resources. And wants to ensure that these are made available to the U.S. and the rest of the world. Why? To avoid a repeat of the OPEC oil embargoes of the 70's and the havoc they wreaked on the commodity and the economies of the world which were dependent on OPEC oil.

Obama and his Administration is all about intimidation, crimes, lies, death and videos while the Democrats celebrate Obama's scandals; and all they can think about is the added corrupt power to be gained in the next election

First of all, it is not the Government's oil and gas. Yes, some of it was discovered on government owned land (the vast majority was discovered on some farmer's land which makes it his to sell to whoever he wants to sell it to). The stuff found on government land belongs to the oil company that discovered it as per the lease agreement both sides signed. The government gets the share they agreed to when they SOLD the lease to the oil company - it's called a royalty. The government took NO risk and still made money. The government gets the lease money whether or not the oil company finds anything or not. If oil is found, the government gets it's royalty right off the top whether the oil company makes a cent or not, and the government gets taxes on all the profits the oil company makes. The oil belongs to the oil company that took the risk. If the government wants to decide what to do with the oil, then they can take the risk and drill the well themselves; but based on my experience they would certainly screw that up and loose every cent they put into the project.

Petronas, the Malay oil company, a nationalized oil company is a model worthy of consideration. Is it unconstitutional for all US peoples to share in the natural resource wealth of OUR lands? Non partisan, home grown and government owned company. Doing its own exploration, not subcontracted, government employees. Doing its own drilling, same constraints.Petronas was recently rebuffed by Canada. Canada decided that Their oils should be exploited by Canada, not a foreign company. Food for thought...An article in the has stated the major beneficiary of Iraqui oil has been China, a country which spent NO money or lives in the war. China Reaps Biggest Benefits of Iraq Oil Boom - The New York Times. Good reading.Sometimes it seems we just give, give give and are pooped on by our elected officials.While oil IS a world commodity, there is NO reason the US government should be interfering in behalf of private companies behalf for this pipeline. If private enterprise wants it, let them build it. NO eminent domain forced sales, No special amendments or laws to help some chosen PRIVATE company or consortium.

Why do we have to pay more for our own products than foreign companies that buy them? The same holds true for high quality pharmaceutical drugs manufactured in the U.S. They are less expensive in most all the OECD countries.

"Why do we have to pay more for our own products than foreign companies that buy them? The same holds true for high quality pharmaceutical drugs manufactured in the U.S. They are less expensive in most all the OECD countries."

Great post & very good question....

Maybe Carmine or Future can answer that for all of us?

Of course, don't expect either one to use a link to justify their post....

To hear the "greeners" and their doomsday forecasts, we all might as well kill ourselves since we will die from the negative effects of energy production anyway. I suggest the doom and gloom forecasters center themselves, take a deep breath, and come up with another option.

No energy production, fossil or renewable, is all good and/or all bad. There are trades-offs in both. I could accept the self-righteousness of conservationists if they were honest and truthful in recognizing this fact not just for fossil fuels but renewables too.

The medium is the message. "Marshall McLuhan was concerned with the observation that we tend to focus on the obvious. In doing so, we largely miss the structural changes in our affairs that are introduced subtly, or over long periods of time. Whenever we create a new innovation - be it an invention or a new idea - many of its properties are fairly obvious to us. We generally know what it will nominally do, or at least what it is intended to do, and what it might replace. We often know what its advantages and disadvantages might be. But it is also often the case that, after a long period of time and experience with the new innovation, we look backward and realize that there were some effects of which we were entirely unaware at the outset. We sometimes call these effects "unintended consequences," although "unanticipated consequences" might be a more accurate description."

"Unintended consequences" seems to signal an open door to "intentional irresponsibility" for a variety of reasons, including cost cutting and higher profit taking, regardless of public safety and human rights.

This includes corporations, contractors and subcontractors, as well as government oversight.

Personal responsibility used to be in the mix, but that is rapidly disappearing. Our current generations are making decisions that may make future generations suffer dire consequences.

It is a very heavy responsibility to see the seriousness of "unintended consequences" and do all to prevent them from the effects that can be life threatening.

It's about trade offs. Nothing is all good and all bad in and of itself. There are both [good and bad] in play in the mix of all things new and old [drones come to mind off the top of my head]. Personal responsibility demands first and foremost that we all recognize this fact in each others' positions and perspectives. Without personally attacking and impugning those who don't share our point of view, especially doing so with the air of righteous indignation. As most conservationists have and do.

Shipping natural gas and petroleum overseas keeps the prices high in America and depletes our dwindling natural resources which cannot be replaced.

The one objective is to make riches for the executives and owners. When the gas runs out, the field workers will be dumped and so will this country.

The atmosphere and oceans are warming up. This is established by temperature measurements, a superbly accurate technology that that give meticulously authentic results.

On the other side are an amazing number of science deniers who cherish and adhere to opinions generated 2000 years ago by the uneducated who believed the sun went around the Earth, understood nothing about reality they were experiencing, and as a result, still wait for a dead man to save the soul which never needed saving in the first place.

Uphold the verdicts of Rome, deny reality. That's what natural disasters were designed to cure. Go Tornados Go!

One of Pat Robertson's famous reasons for natural disasters is that those affected had sinned or made pacts with Satan. Using His analysis, it is clear that those in Oklahoma, the climate denying center of North America who re-elect James Inhofe, should start believing in climate change because the Great Spirits of the Plains are beginning to get irritated.